This article is speaking half truth. Another article stated that DX11.1 needed WDDM 1.2 which is only in windows 8 and is tied into the kernel. It would make perfect sense why DX 11.1 was not offered to windows 7. Also DX11.1 offers some pretty good advantages and will be used when the next generation of consoles comes out.

Click to expand...

I think Microsoft said something about WDDM being the reason why XP didn't get DX10, but the partial DX10 XP hack floating about says that might not be entirely true. After that "Internet Explorer is integrated onto Windows so you can't remove it" lie to the EU, I don't really think it's WDDM and Microsoft just wanted yet another way to get people off XP.

Haven't the next generation of consoles already have their hardware planned out? If not, then I can see MS trying to get DX11.1 on its next console to attempt market adaptation of it. But for the reasons I mentioned in my previous post, I don't think it'd work anyway.

Like someone else stated 11.1 will be about as "widespread" as 10.1 was. I don't think we'll be missing out on much. I doubt Dev's will be jumping all over an incremental update and will just hold out for DX12.

Who really gives a crap? I mean DX11.1 will have to be on the video card as well right? What I mean is if you have a DX11 card and DX11 OS then getting a OS that has DX11.1 really doesn't mean shit if you have a DX11 card. I do not know and really do not care. Just how many games are out that even use DX11 right now? Hardly enough and buying a video card and OS that has DX11.1 would be just as useless IMHO.

Come on guys, this is just some random employee saying what might happen.

Until I get concrete evidence this is happening I won't take this thread seriously. I want facts not if, buts, maybe, coulds, shoulds, perhaps..otherwise I'd read Fudzilla. Even if it was three on hypothetical level it wouldn't affect my gaming experience on Win 7 one bit.

Who really gives a crap? I mean DX11.1 will have to be on the video card as well right? What I mean is if you have a DX11 card and DX11 OS then getting a OS that has DX11.1 really doesn't mean shit if you have a DX11 card. I do not know and really do not care. Just how many games are out that even use DX11 right now? Hardly enough and buying a video card and OS that has DX11.1 would be just as useless IMHO.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

And not only that you'll lose frame rate enabling the enhanced features for a visual experience you won't notice.

This isn't like the move from DX10 from DX9 where MS blocked it on XP. This is only a minor update to DX11. Plus, an employee saying that MS "may" not support 11.1 on Windows 7 is nothing close to being an official statement.

I think very few will move to linux. Those endless distros have a long way of improving usability and getting closer to windows or mac os. The kernel is strong, no doubt there, but the rest is just crap.

Use HLSL minimum precision
Starting with Windows 8, graphics drivers can implement minimum precision HLSL scalar data types by using any precision greater than or equal to their specified bit precision. When your HLSL minimum precision shader code is used on hardware that implements HLSL minimum precision, you use less memory bandwidth and as a result you also use less system power.

Click to expand...

Use UAVs at every pipeline stage
Direct3D 11.1 lets you use the following shader model 5.0 instructions at all shader stages that were previously used in just pixel shaders and compute shaders.

Unless the D3D 11.1 changes are something specific to Metro/Windows Store, I think the update will be retroactive to Vista and 7.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that. I think Bonkers has a point. Microsoft has done this in the past and it was a push to adopt the new OS. Apple tends to do this as well and it's a method that works pretty well and I think Microsoft knows that.

It wasn't to push a new OS, it was to remove compatibility bits that were bogging the API down. Remember, Vista/7/8 literally have two versions of DirectX running in parrallel (DirectX Legacy and DirectX 10/10.1/11/11.1). To make DirectX 10 work on XP, they would have had to essentially upgrade the entire OS to be Vista. That's why they didn't, and still don't, have DirectX 10 support on XP. Most developers still elect to support it, however.